Same impression so far although I did not go back and try to refresh my memory ;-(.Don't have enough experience whether a little EQ-ing can fix it (or was the cause why they stood out for me in earlier FW).Martin

Frankly, based on that video, I don't know how anyone could prefer the Strat sounds in 1.9 compared to 2.0, but it's all based on personal opinion. But my personal opinion is that the 1.9 Strat sounds in that video sound somewhat lifeless compared to the 2.0 ones. But, yes, the sounds in this video pretty much square with my experience from going from 1.9 to 2.0.

1

"It is not our duty to understand the arbitrary, meaningless dictates of machines"

i was just having a mad love affair with jazzbox 4 last night (super 400/neck)

i suppose it depends on what you're looking for, but it was giving me what i wanted last night.

I think the models semi5, jazztone 4, spank and 2 and 4 are best in pre hd, the rest I think the best in hd, but in this video he compares semi with humbuckin with semi with p90, are really different to compare

I thinkthe modelssemi5,jazztone 4,spankand2and4arebest in prehd,the rest Ithinkthebest in hd

Okay, so I think your answer to the 1. Yes/No question is "YES Spank 1,3, and 5 are better in HD" in your opinion, is this what you are saying?

Trying to narrow it down here to figure out what is going on... have you tried adjusting the volume of the pickups relative to each other in position 2 and 4 in Workbench? I am thinking if the guitar modeled in HD had slightly different height adjustments on the pickups compared to the guitar used in the original modeling it would affect the way the pickups blend in position 2 and 4, and adjusting the relative pickup volumes in Workbench may give you a sound closer to the pre HD version of Spank 2 and 4.

in this video he compares semi with humbuckin with semi with p90, arereallydifferentto compare

Okay - OTHER THAN THE SEMI , are you experiencing results with the HD upgrade similar to what is shown in the video?

I havenotworked withthe new modelsin the workbenchwhen you have timetry tochangeSomethings, but whatyou aresaying aboutadjustingvolumesin2pickpusmake much sense,I'll stilltry it

about the results of video, I think themostimprovedmodels,except thosealreadymentioned earlier,but Ithinkthat the volumesof the new modelswerelower,especiallythehdstratpickupsbeforewere much higherthan themagnetic,not now

couldanswer everything?sorrymy englishis not verygood,sometimes do notunderstandthetechnical termsset outhere in the forum

Okay, so I think your answer to the 1. Yes/No question is "YES Spank 1,3, and 5 are better in HD" in your opinion, is this what you are saying?

Trying to narrow it down here to figure out what is going on... have you tried adjusting the volume of the pickups relative to each other in position 2 and 4 in Workbench? I am thinking if the guitar modeled in HD had slightly different height adjustments on the pickups compared to the guitar used in the original modeling it would affect the way the pickups blend in position 2 and 4, and adjusting the relative pickup volumes in Workbench may give you a sound closer to the pre HD version of Spank 2 and 4.

Okay - OTHER THAN THE SEMI , are you experiencing results with the HD upgrade similar to what is shown in the video?

hey guys... try this... just did it to mine and position 2/4 sound much closer to the 1.9 type strat...

i changed the taper from audio to linear on the pots.

its still an HD model.. and still subjective... but making this small change seemed to bring them closer.

also, it looked like the default position 2 only had the middle pup engaged... so i turned on the bridge with that model.

anyway be curious to know if this does anything for anyone else.

Hmmm, interesting.

I asked question 1. thinking that if someone likes position 1, 3, and 5 better in HD but 2 and 4 better pre HD that there is something different in the way the pickups are combining in the HD version, if position 2 has the middle pickup only that would make a HUGE difference. Also, different pots or caps settings in HD defaults could be making the sounds wildly different, I can't connect to Workbench yet to check this or to test adjusting the pickup levels ( have been using HD500 to connect my JTV and still have not gotten around to unpacking/charging the battey to use the Workbench dongle, maybe this week).

I ask question 2. to try to narrow things down in this discussion to questions of taste and/or real problems - if someone is experiencing the same results with their JTV update as those shown in the video and prefers the sound of Spank 2 and 4 in the old firmware then we are probably discussing matters of taste, but if someone is experience wildly different results than those shown in the video this may indicate they are in need of a reflash (or might possibly have more serious problems with their guitar).

Positions 2 and 4 need both middle and end pickup turned on to get the "quack" Strat sound as these pickups are supposed to be wired out of phase.

Yes, 2 pickups have to be turned on for position 2 and 4 Strat sounds, but that sound is not caused by the pickups being wired out of phase, it is caused by the two pickups picking up sound on different parts of the string - probably still called "out of phase" string-vibration wise but not wiring-wise. I have wired my Strat pickups out of phase before (reversed the leads) but this does not give you the classic Strat "Quack/Cluck" sound, it gives you an extremely pronounced hollow out of phase sound that would be of limited use to most people.

Connect to Workbench, choose Spank position 2 or 4 and click the reverse polarity switch to simulate out of phase wiring and you should hear a huge difference.

"I start with both N and M at the same distance from the strings and then slighty lower (like 1/4 turn) the bass side of the middle pickup. I do the same for the treble side but usually a little lower. I usually do this by ear because you can change a dull cluck into a sharp cluck with a fraction of a turn and i'm usually trying to sharpen up the bass side and mellow out the treble side."

Just to clarify: on Strats, although the middle pickup is reverse wound, the magnets are also installed reverse polarity. Thus, any selection with the middle pickup is IN-PHASE, not OUT-OF-PHASE (but it does kill hum).

Brian May used neck and middle out-of-phase for the Bohemian Rhapsody solo, but it's not his normal sound. Basically, it kills a lot of the low end sound due to the signal cancellation. It doesn't kill it all due to the space between the pickups ensuring they don't pick up the identical sound. Plus, Brian's pickups are in series, not parallel. Out of phase results in a thinner sound than people generally find useful.

Just to clarify: on Strats, although the middle pickup is reverse wound, the magnets are also installed reverse polarity. Thus, any selection with the middle pickup is IN-PHASE, not OUT-OF-PHASE (but it does kill hum).

Unless you are a boob like me and reverse the leads

Did this recently when installing a new bridge pickup, the guitar instantly sounded terrible in position 2 - both out of phase and with twice the noise of either of the pickups alone.

I DID wire it properly the first time according to the GFS supplied wiring diagram - it looks like they may have mistakenly switched the leads at the factory...? Or sent me a middle position pickup mistakenly labeled as a bridge pickup? One of the wires was yellow, usually Fender color coding for middle position as I recall.

Decreasing the volume of the middle pickup definitely helps bring the quack back on position 4. It doesn't seem to do as much for position 2, but IMO, position 2 sounds pretty good (although I may favor 1.9 a bit on this).

For me, aside from the acoustic 5 position, the sounds I've been using the most are also the most affected by the 2.0 update,

that is, the neck positions of the jazzbox models, the thinline telecaster neck position and strat 2 and 4 positions.
With my 700 I also use a custom made les paul preset, because it doesn't have the magnetic pickups.

There's not so much to win, feature wise, in comparison with 1.9 so... why am I keeping 2.0?

Well, I loved strat 2 and 4, and I don't think I'm ever going to be able to replicate them with 2.0, but the thing is, after a while,

I'm not so sure I prefer those sounds, that I've used so much and grown to feel at home with, to the similar ones I'm getting

with 2.0.

Up until now, all I've been doing is editing guitar models with workbench and playing them through their associated patches

in the HD500, so I can better notice what has been changed and what hasn't. Sean Halley suggests that we may appreciate

the new sounds more if we listen to them with an open mind, not expecting them to sound instantly right through existing patcheshttp://line6.com/sup...ge-4#entry12649
Well, I understand that, but I still need to hear what's going on and hear the differences. Now it's up to me to redo some of

those patches. Why am I willing to do so much effort when I can simply stay with 1.9 and sound OK? Well, that's where I'm getting to

I love having all variax patch volumes sound the same, in terms of perceived loudness, so it took me a while to get that with

the new models, and had to create a custom bank to replicate the one I had before. One of those patches I created is a jazzbox

with the R-Billy Tron neck pickup, which sounds as woody as the previous jazzboxes did, and another is a strat 2 substitute with

the tone pot about 85% that sounds more mellow and can be an instant substitute (not replica, but substitute) for the former

strat 2 position.

And finally, the reason why I decided to keep the 2.0 is that it's simply more musical.

I did hours of A/B testing yesterday, switching back and forth between the v700 and the JTV-89, and everytime I went back to

the JTV aiming to replicate the sounds on the 700, I came up with some really good sound. Never a replica, but a better version.

Anyway, if I miss the older models, I have my 700 for that, but I bet that, once I've redone some patches, I won't miss the old models

so much.

That said, the JTV-89 custom bank in 1.9 led me to expect to be able to split coils, but instead, I have to use actual single coils for that effect. Will I survive? Yes, it's just that I was counting on this new feature.

Oh, and I want the thinline body back!

On the "undoubtedly better" side of things, I have to say that the new Rick 12 string models are amazing, and the P90's, and the wide range humbuckers, and the LP, and all resonators, and the tone pot response, and... and...

hey guys... try this... just did it to mine and position 2/4 sound much closer to the 1.9 type strat...

i changed the taper from audio to linear on the pots.

its still an HD model.. and still subjective... but making this small change seemed to bring them closer.

also, it looked like the default position 2 only had the middle pup engaged... so i turned on the bridge with that model.

anyway be curious to know if this does anything for anyone else.

I agree with you! I own a Variax 700 and the sound of Spank 2 is more similar to that of the Variax Standard if you change Taper to Linear. It becomes less neutral and more colourfull. I Think the same applies to T-Model-1.